As in other states that employ the Westminster political system, Her Majesty's Home Civil Service forms an inseparable part of the British government. The executive decisions of government ministers are implemented by HM Civil Service. Civil servants are employees of the Crown and not of the British parliament. Civil servants also have some traditional and statutory responsibilities which to some extent protect them from being used for the political advantage of the party in power. Senior civil servants may be called to account to Parliament.

In general use, the term civil servant in the United Kingdom does not include all public sector employees; although there is no fixed legal definition, the term is usually defined as a "servant of the Crown working in a civil capacity who is not the holder of a political (or judicial) office; the holder of certain other offices in respect of whose tenure of office special provision has been made; [or] a servant of the Crown in a personal capacity paid from the Civil List".[4] As such, the civil service does not include government ministers (who are politically appointed), members of the British Armed Forces, the police, officers of local government authorities or quangos of the Houses of Parliament, employees of the National Health Service (NHS), or staff of the Royal Household. As at the end of March 2016 there were 418,343 civil servants in the Home Civil Service, this is down 3.6% on the previous year.[5]

The Offices of State grew in England, and later the United Kingdom. Initially, as in other countries, they were little more than secretariats for their leaders, who held positions at court. They were chosen by the king on the advise of a patron, and typically replaces when their patron lost influence. In the 18th century, in response to the growth of the British Empire and economic changes, institutions such as the Office of Works and the Navy Board grew large. Each had its own system and staff were appointed by purchase or patronage. By the 19th century, it became increasingly clear that these arrangements were not working.

In 1806, the East India Company, a private company that ruled only in India, established a college, the East India Company College, near London. The purpose of this college was to train administrators; it was established on recommendation of officials in China who had seen the imperial examination system. The civil service, based on examination similar to the Chinese system, was advocated by a number of Englishmen over the next several decades.[8]

William Ewart Gladstone, then a junior minister, in 1850 sought a more efficient system based on expertise rather than favouritism. The East India Company provided a model for Stafford Northcote, the private Secretary to Gladstone, who with Charles Trevelyan (Permanent Secretary of the Treasury)( drafted the key report in 1854. A permanent, unified and politically neutral civil service, in which appointments were made on merit, was introduced on the recommendations of the Northcote–Trevelyan Report of 1854, which also recommended a clear division between staff responsible for routine ("mechanical") work, and those engaged in policy formulation and implementation in an "administrative" class. The report was not implemented, but it came at a time when the bureaucratic chaos in the Crimean War demonstrated that the military was as backward as the civil service. A Civil Service Commission was set up in 1855 to oversee open recruitment and end patronage. Prime Minister Gladstone took the decisive step in 1870 with his Order in Council to implement the Northcote-Trevelyan proposals.[9] This system was broadly endorsed by Commissions chaired by Playfair (1874), Ridley (1886), MacDonnell (1914), Tomlin (1931) and Priestley (1955).

The Northcote–Trevelyan model remained essentially stable for a hundred years. This was a tribute to its success in removing corruption, delivering public services (even under the stress of two world wars), and responding effectively to political change. Patrick Diamond argues:

The Northcote-Trevelyan model was characterised by a hierarchical mode of Weberian bureaucracy; neutral, permanent and anonymous officials motivated by the public interest; and a willingness to administer policies ultimately determined by ministers. This bequeathed a set of theories, institutions and practices to subsequent generations of administrators in the central state.[10]

Following the Second World War, however, demands for change again grew. There was a concern (illustrated in C. P. Snow's Strangers and Brothers series of novels) that technical and scientific expertise was mushrooming, to a point at which the "good all-rounder" culture of the administrative civil servant with a classics or other arts degree could no longer properly engage with it: as late as 1963, for example, the Treasury had just 19 trained economists. The times were, moreover, ones of keen respect for technocracy, with the mass mobilisation of war having worked effectively, and the French National Plan apparently delivering economic success. And there was also a feeling which would not go away, following the war and the radical social reforms of the 1945 Labour government, that the so-called "mandarins" of the higher civil service were too remote from the people. Indeed, between 1948 and 1963 only 3% of the recruits to the administrative class came from the working classes, and in 1966 more than half of the administrators at undersecretary level and above had been privately educated.

Lord Fulton's committee reported in 1968. He found that administrators were not professional enough, and in particular lacked management skills; that the position of technical and scientific experts needed to be rationalised and enhanced; and that the service was indeed too remote. His 158 recommendations included the introduction of a unified grading system for all categories of staff, a Civil Service College and a central policy planning unit. He also said that control of the service should be taken from the Treasury, and given to a new Department, and that the "fast stream" recruitment process for accessing the upper echelons should be made more flexible, to encourage candidates from less privileged backgrounds. The new Department was set up by Prime Minister Harold Wilson's Labour Government in 1968 and named the Civil Service Department, known as CSD. The first Minister was Cabinet Minister Lord Shackleton, also Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal. The first Permanent Secretary was Sir William Armstrong, who moved over from his post as Permanent Secretary at the Treasury. After the 1970 General Election, new Conservative Prime Minister Ted Heath appointed Lord Jellicoe in Lord Shackleton's place.

But, whether through lack of political will, or through passive resistance by a mandarinate which the report had suggested were "amateurs", Fulton failed. The Civil Service College equipped generalists with additional skills, but did not turn them into qualified professionals as ENA did in France. Recruits to the fast stream self-selected, with the universities of Oxford and Cambridge still producing a large majority of successful English candidates, since the system continued to favour the tutorial system at Oxbridge while to an extent the Scottish Ancient universities educated a good proportion of recruits from north of the border. The younger mandarins found excuses to avoid managerial jobs in favour of the more prestigious postings. The generalists remained on top, and the specialists on tap.

Margaret Thatcher came to office in 1979 believing in free markets as a better social system in many areas than the state: government should be small but active. Many of her ministers were suspicious of the civil service, in light of public choice research that suggested public servants tend to increase their own power and budgets.

She immediately set about reducing the size of the civil service, cutting numbers from 732,000 to 594,000 over her first seven years in office. Derek Rayner, the former chief executive of Marks & Spencer, was appointed as an efficiency expert with the Prime Minister's personal backing; he identified numerous problems with the Civil Service, arguing that only three billion of the eight billion pounds a year spent at that time by the Civil Service consisted of essential services, and that the "mandarins" (senior civil servants) needed to focus on efficiency and management rather than on policy advice.[12] In late 1981 the Prime Minister announced the abolition of the Civil Service Department, transferring power over the Civil Service to the Prime Minister's Office and Cabinet Office.[13] The Priestley Commission principle of pay comparability with the private sector was abandoned in February 1982.

Meanwhile, Michael Heseltine was introducing a comprehensive system of corporate and business planning (known as MINIS) first in the Department of the Environment and then in the Ministry of Defence. This led to the Financial Management Initiative, launched in September 1982 (Efficiency and Effectiveness in the Civil Service (Cmnd 8616)) as an umbrella for the efficiency scrutiny programme and with a wider focus on corporate planning, efficiency and objective-setting. Progress initially was sluggish, but in due course MINIS-style business planning became standard, and delegated budgets were introduced, so that individual managers were held much more accountable for meeting objectives, and for the first time for the resources they used to do so. Performance-related pay began in December 1984, was built on thereafter, and continues to this day, though the sums involved have always been small compared to the private sector, and the effectiveness of PRP as a genuine motivator has often been questioned.

In February 1988 Robin Ibbs, who had been recruited from ICI in July 1983 to run the Efficiency Unit (now in No. 10), published his report Improving Management in Government: The Next Steps. This envisaged a new approach to delivery featuring clear targets and personal responsibility. Without any statutory change, the managerial functions of Ministries would be hived off into Executive Agencies, with clear Framework Documents setting out their objectives, and whose chief executives would be made accountable directly (in some cases to Parliament) for performance. Agencies were to, as far as possible, take a commercial approach to their tasks. However, the Government conceded that agency staff would remain civil servants, which diluted the radicalism of the reform. The approach seems somewhat similar to the Swedish model, though no influence from Sweden has ever been acknowledged.

The Next Steps Initiative took some years to get off the ground, and progress was patchy. Significant change was achieved, although agencies never really achieved the level of autonomy envisaged at the start.[14] By 5 April 1993, 89 agencies had been established, and contained over 260,000 civil servants, some 49% of the total.[15]

The focus on smaller, more accountable, units revived the keenness of Ministerial interest in the perceived efficiencies of the private sector. Already in the late 1980s, some common services once set up to capture economies of scale, such as the Property Services Agency and the Crown Suppliers, were being dismantled or sold off. Next, shortly after Thatcher left office, in July 1991, a new programme of market-testing of central government services began, with the White Paper Competing for Quality (Cm 1730). Five-yearly or three-yearly policy and finance reviews of all agencies and other public bodies were instituted, where the first question to be answered (the "prior options exercise") was why the function should not be abolished or privatised. In November 1991 the private finance initiative was launched, and by November 1994 the Chancellor of the Exchequer had referred to it as ‘the funding mechanism of choice for most public sector projects’. In 1995 the decision was taken to privatise the Chessington Computer Centre, HMSO, the Occupational Health & Safety Agency and Recruitment & Assessment Services.

It was believed with the Thatcher reforms that efficiency was improving. But there was still a perception of carelessness and lack of responsiveness in the quality of public services. The government of John Major sought to tackle this with a Citizen's Charter programme. This sought to empower the service user, by setting out rights to standards in each service area, and arrangements for compensation when these were not met. An Office of Public Service and Science was set up in 1992, to see that the Charter policy was implemented across government.

By 1998, 42 Charters had been published, and they included services provided by public service industries such as the health service and the railways, as well as by the civil service. The programme was also expanded to apply to other organisations such as local government or housing associations, through a scheme of "Chartermark" awards. The programme was greeted with some derision, and it is true that the compensation sometimes hardly seemed worth the effort of claiming, and that the service standards were rarely set with much consumer input. But the initiative did have a significant effect in changing cultures, and paradoxically the spin-off Chartermark initiative may have had more impact on local organisations uncertain about what standards to aim for, than the parent Citizen's Charter programme itself.

The highest ranking civil servant in the country is the Cabinet Secretary. A subsidiary title that was also held by the incumbent was Head of the Home Civil Service or more recently sometimes styled Head of the Civil Service,[16] who until recently was also the incumbent Cabinet Secretary and Permanent Secretary of the Cabinet Office.[17] However, following the Coalition Government of David Cameron the three posts were split from the single holder. The last person to hold all three positions together was Gus O'Donnell, Cabinet Secretary, Head of the Home Civil Service and Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, September 2005 – January 2012. The postholder is responsible for ensuring that the Civil Service is equipped with the skills and capability to meet the everyday challenges it faces and that civil servants work in a fair and decent environment. They also chair the Permanent Secretary Management Group and the Civil Service Steering Board which are the main governing bodies of the Civil Service.[17]

It was announced on 11 October 2011 that, following O'Donnell's retirement at the end of 2011, the role of Head of the Home Civil Service would be split from the post of Cabinet Secretary. There will additionally be a new, separate, Permanent Secretary to lead the Cabinet Office.[18] After O'Donnell's retirement, Jeremy Heywood replaced him as Cabinet Secretary; Ian Watmore as Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary; and lastly, Bob Kerslake as Head of the Home Civil Service.[19] In July 2014 it was announced that Kerslake would step down and Heywood would take the title of Head of the HCS.[20]

The PSMG consider issues of strategic importance to the Civil Service as a whole, as well as providing corporate leadership where a single position is required across all government departments.[22] It is chaired by the Head of the Home Civil Service[17] and consists of all first permanent secretaries and other selected permanent secretaries and directors general. This includes the Head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service,[6] and the Head of the Diplomatic Service.[7]

The CSSB was established in 2007 and meets monthly,[23] Its role is to enhance the performance and reputation of the Civil Service by focusing on specific areas delegated to it by PSMG.[23][24] The CSSB is chaired by the Head of the Home Civil Service.[17]

The Civil Service Commissioners are not civil servants and are independent of Ministers, they are appointed directly by the Crown under Royal Prerogative and they report annually to The Queen.[25]

Their main role is regarding the recruitment of civil servants. They have the responsibility to ensure that all civil servants are recruited on the "principle of selection on merit on the basis of fair and open competition." They maintain a recruitment code on the interpretation and application of that principle, and approve any exceptions to it. They audit recruitment policies and practices within the Civil Service and approve all appointments to the most senior levels of the Civil Service.[26]

The Commissioners also hear and determine appeals in cases of concern about propriety and conscience raised by civil servants under the Civil Service Code which cannot be resolved through internal procedures.[26]

Northern Ireland has a separate Commission called the Civil Service Commissioners for Northern Ireland which has the same role.[26][27]

The Home Civil Service is a politically neutral body, with the function of impartially implementing the policy programme of the elected government.[28][29][30]

Like all servants of the Crown, civil servants are legally barred from standing for election as Members of Parliament or Members of the European Parliament.[31] Also, under regulations first adopted in 1954 and revised in 1984, members of the Senior Civil Service (the top management grades) are barred from holding office in a political party or publicly expressing controversial political viewpoints, while less senior civil servants at an intermediate (managerial) level must generally seek permission to participate in political activities. The most junior civil servants are permitted to participate in political activities, but must be politically neutral in the exercise of their duties.[31]

All civil servants are subject to the Official Secrets Acts 1911 to 1989, meaning that they may not disclose sensitive government information. Since 1998, there have also been restrictions on contact between civil servants and lobbyists; this followed an incident known as "Lobbygate", where an undercover reporter for The Observer, posing as a business leader, was introduced by a lobbyist to a senior Downing Street official who promised privileged access to government ministers.[32][33] The Committee on Standards in Public Life, also created in 1998, is responsible for regulation of contacts between public officials and lobbyists.

The increasing influence of politically appointed "special advisers" in government departments can reduce the political neutrality of public administration. In Thatcher's government, Alan Walters was an official adviser from 1981 to 1984, and again in 1989.[34] Walters' criticisms "of many aspects of Treasury policy, particularly in relation to exchange rate policy" and Thatcher's refusal to dismiss him led to Nigel Lawson's resignation as chancellor in 1989.[34] Thatcher also claimed that the 1981 budget, which increased taxes during the recession and was criticised by 364 economists, had been devised by Walters.[34] In 2000, then-Prime Minister Tony Blair was criticised for appointing 20 special advisers (compared to eight under his predecessor John Major) and for the fact that the total salary cost of special advisers across all government departments had reached £4 million.[35] In 2001, Stephen Byers, then Secretary of State for Transport, was forced to resign because of the actions of his special adviser Jo Moore, who instructed a departmental civil servant, Martin Sixsmith, that September 11, 2001, would be "a good day to bury bad news"; this was seen as inappropriate political manipulation of the Civil Service.[36] In particular, under the administration of Tony Blair, the influence of two Downing Street special advisers, Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell, both of whom were given formal power over Downing Street civil servants, provoked widespread criticism.[37]

The Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government of 2010–2015 had proposed introducing a more American-style system where senior civil servants, such as permanent secretaries, became political appointees.[30] However, this was dropped after it was considered that the existing permanent civil service style was better-suited to the government of the United Kingdom.[citation needed]

The current civil service code was introduced on 6 June 2006 to outline the core values and standards expected of civil servants. The core values are defined as integrity, honesty, objectivity, and impartiality. A key change from previous values is the removal of anonymity within the core values.[38] The Code includes an independent line of appeal to the Civil Service Commissioners on alleged breaches of the Code.

The Civil Service Management Code (CSMC) sets out the regulations and instructions to departments and agencies regarding the terms and conditions of service of civil servants. It is the guiding document which gives delegation to civil service organisations, from the Minister for the Civil Service, in order for them to make internal personnel policies.[39]

A two-volume 125-page Directory of Civil Service Guidance was published in 2000 to replace the previous Guidance on Guidance, providing short summaries of guidance on a wide range of issues and pointing to more detailed sources.[42]

The grading system used in the civil service has changed many times, and the current structure is made up of two schemes. All senior grades (Deputy Director / Grade 5 level and above) are part of the Senior Civil Service, which is overseen by the Cabinet Office on behalf of the civil service as a whole. Below the Senior Civil Service, each individual department/executive agency can put in place its own grading and pay arrangements, provided they still comply with the central civil service pay and review guidance.

For other grades many departments overlay their own grading structure, however all these structures must map across to the central government structure as shown below.[43]

All current grades are marked in bold and historical grade names are shown italics.

The lingua franca is to describe Civil Servants, and in particular their grades, predominanly through a lens of Administrative activity (as in the Current Structure of the table above), but in practice the Civil Service has an always had a number of subdivisions, with the Historic Grades having an additional designator (usually omitted for Senior Managers, but included from Middle and Junior Managers) as shown as "xxx", with the major groupings being:

Executive ([x]EO)

Scientific ([x]SO)

Professional and Technology ([x]PTO)

The Current Structure identifies[56] a number of distinct professional groupings:

^The locus classicus showing the difficulty of this boundary was the interview of Michael Howard on Newsnight on 13 May 1997, which pivoted on the question whether as Minister he had intervened in the detailed management of the Prison Services Agency.

^James B. Christoph, Political Rights and Administrative Impartiality in the British Civil Service," in Canadian Public Administration, eds. J.E. Hodgetts and D.C. Corbett (Toronto: Macmillan, 1960), 421.